Judgment :- Jagannadha Rao. CJ. This appeal is preferred against the judgment of the learned single judge in OP 3048 of 1991-K dated 17-11-1992. The writ petitioners are the appellants. They are four in number. First appellant is an Accountant and appellants 2 to 4 are now Senior Clerks. 2. In the writ petition. petitioners questioned Ext.P2 order dated 5-3-1991 passed by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies. Kottayam granting permission to the second respondent-Society to amend 'Feeder Category Rules (called subsidiary regulations in Rule 185(1) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies rules) so as to enable the Society to make direct recruitment to the post of Secretary instead of filling the same by promotion. 3.. It is not in dispute that before the above said order was passed by the Joint Registrar. the appointment to the post of Secretary in the Society was by promotion and not by direct recruitment. The Society considered that so far as the posts of Chief Accountant. Assistant Secretary and Secretary. the appointment should be by direct recruitment and not by way of promotion. To that effect. the Board of Management passed a resolution on 15-1-1991 (Ext.R2 (a)) and sought the permission of the joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The Joint Registrar took a lenient view in the matter and approved only the amendment of the Feeder Category Rules in relation to appointment of Secretary by direct recruitment. He did not approve appointments to the posis of Chief Accountant and Assistant Secretary by direct recruitment. In other words. while the request was to permit direct recruitment for three categories of superior posts and the Joint Registrar approved direct recruitment only for one of the posts. 4. The contention of learned counsel for the appellants is that the above order of the Joint Registrar is illegal. 5. Rule 185(1) of the Rules made under the Cooperative Societies reads as follows: "185. Promotions: - (1) Appointments to higher categories of service in a Society shall ordinarily be made by promotion from among members eligible for appointment to such category in accordance with these rules on the basis of seniority in the feeder category. The -feeder allegory for this purpose shall be prescribed by the society by framing suitable subsidiary regulations with the approval of the Registrar." (Emphasis supplied) As stated above. The -feeder allegory for this purpose shall be prescribed by the society by framing suitable subsidiary regulations with the approval of the Registrar." (Emphasis supplied) As stated above. the Society had made Feeder Category Rules as provided in the latter part of R.183(1) to the effect that the post of Secretary should be filled by promotion. The Society has now sought permission for recruitment to the said post by direct recruitment rather than by promotion. The Joint Registrar granted permission for such conversion. In our view. the latter part of R.185(1) permits modification of the Feeder Category Rules or Regulations with the approval of the Registrar. Therefore. the approval is in order. 6. The next contention is that such Feeder Category Rules or Regulations should provide that the recruitment is always to be by promotion and not by way of direct recruitment. This contention cannot be accepted in view of the word "ordinarily" used in the first part of R.185(1). If the contention of the appellants is to be accepted. it would amount to replacing the word ^ordinarily' by the word "invariably". 7. Learned counsel also wanted to contend mat there is no alternative remedy of appeal against the impugned order passed by the Joint Registrar. We do not think it necessary to go into the said question as the learned single judge has given a finding on this issue on merits and learned counsel also admitted before us that there is no alternative remedy. There are no merits in the Writ Appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.